Acceptable accuracy for a .357 carbine at 50 yds?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have two Rossi pistol caliber carbines/rifles. one is 16 inch barrel, 38/357 and am using a Stevesgunz peep sight, the gun is fairly new, and have not tried for accuracy, just for function, and if I can hit a human target at 50 yards and keep all the shots in the chest or head feel pretty good. I also have a 20 inch barrel Rossi, 454 that also shoots 45 colt. Same thing. I realize could do better with scope, but to me that defeats the purpose of those short barrel carbines.
I am 73 and my hunting days are in the past, I just want to have fun or use them for self defense if I have too.
 
Varminterror said:
And they're $1000 MSRP, $700 street today...

I bought a bunch of Win 94's and Marlin 1894's when they were $250-350, hell my first Marlin 1895 Cowboy was only $420 including tax out the door... But that's a long time gone...

Quite foolish to try to paint me into a box - especially bench shooting... Can't be any farther off of the mark... But it's absolutely true to acknowledge that no matter what kind of imaginary superpowers someone tries to assign to themselves, offhand shooting cannot and does not get the best performance out of the rifles. Shooting offhand measures only the shooter, and hamstrings the rifle. As has been discussed here, even revolver cartridge carbine leverguns should hang onto 2moa or better when given proper support and combination of sight and target, but not many folks are truly capable of holding anywhere close to 2MOA when shooting offhand - Lean on a tree, a fence post, or a pair of shooting sticks or crossed trekking poles, but get some kind of support under the rifle and the in-field performance of the levergun skyrockets.

If a guy wants to make noise and beat up big targets at short ranges, then great. But a levergun deserves to get more respect for performance than what almost ANY shooter can deliver offhand.
Click to expand...
This last sentence drives home something here. You don't hunt much, if at all, do you? Especially with a lever action rifle. Please stop looking down your nose at other shooters who may not have your expertise at shooting skills at long distance with specially built rifles. Try to remember, this thread is about a .357 mag lever action rifle.
 
.45Coltguy said:
You don't hunt much, if at all, do you? Especially with a lever action rifle.
Click to expand...

250 yards with factory Hornady 325 FTX leaving a JM Stamped Marlin 1895 at 1795fps, fired from support on the top of a hedge post, using a $200 Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40 with simple duplex reticle… Not a shot I would have taken offhand - and the hedge post offered more stability than the Primos Trigger Stick I typically would have fired from. 35412642200_7f8d6cf98c_o.jpeg

It’s lazy to ignore options for field expedient support, and to hamstring the performance of your firearm. The animals we’re hunting deserve better.
 
Well, in that case, I must apoligize. I just don't think its right for some to belittle others shooters for not being so astute as some competition shooters.
Let the regular hunters/shooters do what works for them.
 
.45Coltguy said:
Let the regular hunters/shooters do what works for them.
Click to expand...

If they're shooting pie plate groups because they insist on shooting offhand, it ain't "working for them."

I'm just a regular hunter. Nothing special about what I'm doing - except that 35yrs ago, a group of regular hunters showed me how much more stable we could be if we shot our Marlins from shooting sticks in the field instead of offhand.

When I was cowboy action shooting - yes, we made noise, shot fast, and everything was offhand... and everything was on big, close targets... Tools for tasks, if the topic is what degree of precision should be expected from a rifle, then offhand shooting shouldn't be a recommendation...
 
Varminterror said:
^ This and if a target is used which agrees with the sights is used.
Click to expand...
That’s the biggest stipulation most people don’t seem to ever consider, matching the target to your sights. They think you need tiny sights and a tiny target to shoot tiny groups. You just need a target you can consistently bracket your sights against.
 
.45Coltguy said:
Varminterror, you really don't take apologies or other peoples opinions well do you? Well, I say farewell to you.
Click to expand...

Do I accept well a half-hearted apology when someone butts in with an ad hominem attack based on their personal assumption which wasn't warranted in this thread, other than they must simply not like me because I shoot long range with custom rifles? Nah, I don't...
 
Last edited:
CraigC said:
That’s the biggest stipulation most people don’t seem to ever consider, matching the target to your sights. They think you need tiny sights and a tiny target to shoot tiny groups. You just need a target you can consistently bracket your sights against.
Click to expand...

My astigmatism has always sucked, but now my eyes are getting bad enough that my sights have to be REALLY big, and corresponding targets have to be even bigger. Other than pistols, and making noise with 22's, I avoid irons of any flavor these days. I've played a bit with diopter lenses in a ladder on my 336, but I just can't find a happy place.

But man, with 20-something old eyes, shooting 4 position smallbore at 50ft under the Military Science Building, there was no beating the concentric circles of target, aiming black, peep, and front globe.
 
Varminterror said:
But man, with 20-something old eyes, shooting 4 position smallbore at 50ft under the Military Science Building, there was no beating the concentric circles of target, aiming black, peep, and front globe.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, when I went to University the ROTC had a range in the basement. I took "rifle marksmanship" almost every quarter. That was at EWU in Washington State. I also have a JM Marlin, it does under an inch at 100, with peeps. And...wait for it...black powder. :)
marblkgrp.jpg
 
My .357 carbine is the Marlin 1894 - very accurate with virtually any 140 - 158 gr. Jacketed bullet, HP or SP, made no difference.
Cast bullets in that weight range were another matter all together. "Groups" looked more like shotgun patterns! Darn near gave up on shooting cast out of that rifle. Then I decided to go "Heavy for bore size" and went to a 180 gr. GC design by Saeco. That bullet and Lil' Gun powder solved my cast bullet accuracy problems.
After all my testing, the best CAST bullet load has been the Saeco 180 gr. RNFP w/GC (sized .358"), 15.0 gr. of Lil'Gun, and either the Rem 6½ primer (NOT a misprint - I do use this rifle primer in the .357 rifle) or the CCI 550, with OAL of 1.570". This load gives +/-1,675 fps. in my rifle and will stay between 1.5 & 2.0" at 50 yds. and hover at 3" at 100 yds. IF I do my part.
I hope this helps.
 
Let's not argue guys, this is, other than the noise, is a great thread about lever guns, which a lot of our members like, including myself. Plus I have
always though a lever gun in .357 Mag would be great fun, even capable of hunting deer at reasonable ranges.

Too bad they are so pricy these days compared to what they were, but then heck, most stuff is. Having given two of my lever guns to my sons,
and one to a nephew, I only have one left, but it's a nice one. If I'm careful off of a rest it can shoot just under 1 MOA at 100 yards using hunting
ammo.

.35 caliber, but .35 Remington instead of .357 Mag. I've been known to shoot .357 Mag pistol bullets in it for fun though. Maybe another
lever gun should be my next gun purchase............hmmmm..... straight grip this time........I like those too.......:)
Marlin 336 .35 Remington - Vortex 2X7X32 Pic 1 @ 75%.JPG
 
Varminterror said:
My astigmatism has always sucked, but now my eyes are getting bad enough that my sights have to be REALLY big, and corresponding targets have to be even bigger. Other than pistols, and making noise with 22's, I avoid irons of any flavor these days. I've played a bit with diopter lenses in a ladder on my 336, but I just can't find a happy place.

But man, with 20-something old eyes, shooting 4 position smallbore at 50ft under the Military Science Building, there was no beating the concentric circles of target, aiming black, peep, and front globe.
Click to expand...
20yrs ago I was shooting MOA with buckhorns. Today, my vision is going to pot and I struggle to see them. Though it seems to more fatigue from working behind a desk for nearly 20yrs.


Walkalong said:
Too bad they are so pricy these days compared to what they were, but then heck, most stuff is.
Click to expand...
I try to convince myself that $1000 is the new $500 but it's easier said than done.
 
CraigC said:
I try to convince myself that $1000 is the new $500 but it's easier said than done.
Click to expand...

Ditto.

When a cheap Rem 700 SPS rose from $400 to $550 and a cheap M4gery went from $450 to $700, but a Winchester 94 rose from $300 to $1000, something just doesn't feel right.

I bought the first Win 94 Trapper in 357mag I ever owned my sophomore year of HS by convincing my highschool girlfriend once a month on weekly date night to stay home and let me cook and watch a movie from Blockbuster instead of driving to town to a restaurant. I saved about $45 per month doing so, and in 6 months my books covered the Win 94. The savings on staying home once per month for 6 months to "Netflix & Chill" with steaks on the grill with my wife vs. going into town for supper and a night out sure wouldn't add up to a Win 94 today.
 
Last edited:
I installed a Marble's tang sight on my Miroku '73,used a dovetail blank as the ladder sight interfered with the sight picture. It will make cloverleafs at 50yds. Thinking of buying one of the folding barrel sights like what came on my 1980's came on my 1980's 10/22 for close in fast shots.
 

Attachments

  • Winchester with Marble's sight 002.JPG
    Winchester with Marble's sight 002.JPG
    156.1 KB · Views: 4
Walkalong said:
Let's not argue guys, this is, other than the noise, is a great thread about lever guns, which a lot of our members like, including myself. Plus I have
always though a lever gun in .357 Mag would be great fun, even capable of hunting deer at reasonable ranges.

Too bad they are so pricy these days compared to what they were, but then heck, most stuff is. Having given two of my lever guns to my sons,
and one to a nephew, I only have one left, but it's a nice one. If I'm careful off of a rest it can shoot just under 1 MOA at 100 yards using hunting
ammo.

.35 caliber, but .35 Remington instead of .357 Mag. I've been known to shoot .357 Mag pistol bullets in it for fun though. Maybe another
lever gun should be my next gun purchase............hmmmm..... straight grip this time........I like those too.......:)
View attachment 1193966
Click to expand...
I'm working on a load now for my 358Win (7600 Pump) using IMR 4227 and 180 grn XTPs. My sole purpose is getting some off-hand practice in on my AR500 TGTs without screwing them up.

We were out this am shooting .22lRs "off hand" at small game silhouettes just for practice.

While I'm a firm believer in using a rest and practice off of bipods, tripods, back packs etc. IF you hunt while moving, off-hand skills are a "good thing".
 
KansasTrapper77 said:
I agree completely my Remlin 45-70 tightened up nicely just by installing a 1moa holographic. Kinda ruins the lever guns line with the holographic sitting on it but I shoot better with it on. Its my “brush gun” for running deer at 50 yards ish.
Click to expand...
Agree with both points. It is like mag wheels on a Model T, but if it works, it works.
Really think about a tang sight...it's a 19th Century red dot. :)
Moon
 
Mercy Me said:
Then I decided to go "Heavy for bore size" and went to a 180 gr. GC design by Saeco. That bullet and Lil' Gun powder solved my cast bullet accuracy problems.
Click to expand...
My Rossi 92 in .357 does very well with a 200 grain GC bullet, and a max charge of WW296. I really think the .357 in a rifle is "better served" with 180 to 200 grain bullets, rather than the pistol-pills of 158 grains and less. I would not consider 180 grains "heavy for bore size" at all. Not in a rifle.

I have not tried any serious shooting off the bench with that load, but casual shooting from a sitting position at the old paper plate tells me that it is accurate for what I use it for, trekking, exploring and hiking in some pretty remote/wild country. (a 20" 92 is sure a joy to carry all day) I don't plink or target shoot with it.
 
Ugly Sauce said:
My Rossi 92 in .357 does very well with a 200 grain GC bullet, and a max charge of WW296. I really think the .357 in a rifle is "better served" with 180 to 200 grain bullets, rather than the pistol-pills of 158 grains and less. I would not consider 180 grains "heavy for bore size" at all. Not in a rifle.

I have not tried any serious shooting off the bench with that load, but casual shooting from a sitting position at the old paper plate tells me that it is accurate for what I use it for, trekking, exploring and hiking in some pretty remote/wild country. (a 20" 92 is sure a joy to carry all day) I don't plink or target shoot with it.
Click to expand...
Agree. 180gr coated rnfp over 11.5gr 2400 is real nice in my Henry rifle. 80-100 yard steel ringer to be sure.
 
JohnB-40 said:
I installed a Marble's tang sight on my Miroku '73,used a dovetail blank as the ladder sight interfered with the sight picture. It will make cloverleafs at 50yds. Thinking of buying one of the folding barrel sights like what came on my 1980's came on my 1980's 10/22 for close in fast shots.
Click to expand...
Oh, John, we're playing on the same page. :) Have your exact setup on a '73; the OEM barrel sight was in the way when trying to use the tang. I got a folding, open sight to replace it, and yes, it is great for really fast and nasty shots.
Also makes a useful backup, should you stumble and bugger the tang.
BTW, zeroed the midbarrel sight by simply looking through the tang, and lining it up. Pretty much spot on.
The Marbles is the way to go, rather than Lyman...the Marbles is adjustable for windage too.
The open sights aren't hard to find, but you will have to choose from (IIRC) three heights, though there is a range of adjustment for elevation.
Moon
 
as a new haven conn boy with lots of family in firearm or firearm manufacturer related businesses i have fair observation to pass on. lever guns required as much fitting to make as a decent double barrel shotgun. as such they were sold at below the cost to manufacture them. ammo sales or other guns in the same brand name (loyalty> a thing of the past) were to carry the overall picture. fwiw
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

76shuvlinoff
  • Locked
plinking with the .357 lever
Replies
5
Views
555
76shuvlinoff
76shuvlinoff
Trey Veston
Acceptable accuracy for a pistol carbine, Part II.
Replies
5
Views
247
dobedo
dobedo
Lash3006
  • Locked
Acceptable accuracy
2 3
Replies
53
Views
4K
Lash3006
Lash3006
K
  • Locked
Odd windage difference between 38 and 357 in lever rifle?
Replies
4
Views
447
loose noose
loose noose
P
  • Locked
Accuracy Of Ghost Ring Sights On A Carbine
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Sistema1927
Sistema1927
Back
Top